- Video
-
Club Roar
Captured a great grassroots sporting moment? We want to see it!Content Collections
The Roar Community
- Join
- Login
Dear Davo Smithy, today it’s time to kick the hornet’s nest. I’m talking about that often feared phrase that strikes fear into the hearts of the most one-eyed fans: Sydney team rationalisation.
Let’s be honest here, this is nothing new. Talk of Sydney teams relocating and merging has been going on for decades.
Why? Because the NRL was born out of a suburban comp that never predicted that one day it would become an international competition.
But we still cling to these suburban teams out of heritage and loyalty.
The problem is however that while some teams have made the transition from the suburbs to the big show, several are stuck in the doldrums.
Now let me get this out of the way early – this is not an attack on the current Sharks situation.
When I first read sensationalist journos wanting to boot them out during their worst time of distress, I said it would be a foolish mistake.
Expansion should be positive, a sign of growth. You shouldn’t base your policy around kicking existing fans when they’re down.
So no, now’s not the right time for reactive measures. That said it’s actually a good opportunity to talk about long term strategy.
In my opinion there are haves and have nots in Sydney and the gap between the two groups looks set to widen.
The have-nots are the clubs that appear to be bogged down in their enclaves. History has shown us that the big clubs get bigger and the smaller clubs all face an inevitable crunch – being propped up, folding, relocating or merging.
Propping up clubs long term isn’t healthy. Those clubs will always be dragging down the rest of the comp but if we want to remain in key strategic locations then we might not have any other options.
On the other hand folding a club is insane. Rugby league has lost enough fans during the previous culls. I say put the axe down. That leaves two options: relocation or an intra-city merger.
For mine a merger is preferable. Fans in the original heartland can still have a team that’s based there rather than one that’s hundreds of kilometres away.
Also every home game would be in Sydney rather than interstate and the issues of two smaller clubs can be addressed at the same time rather than just one.
Meanwhile, you don’t have to sell non-heartland fans the concept of adopting a failed club.
The other benefit is that in a 20-team competition it opens up five expansion positions (potentially Perth, Adelaide, Central Coast, South-West Brisbane and Wellington-Christchurch).
There are certainly plenty of metrics to be considered when ranking the Sydney clubs. Crowds, members, financial security, demographics, junior structures et al. However for the moment I’d like to focus on one in particular – fan-base.
It’s one thing to say that you’ve got all the money under the sun or that you’ve got a massive population to tap into. But if you haven’t converted that into TV viewers, members or bums on seats, then you need to ask yourself what business you have in running a major sports club to begin with:
So some measures/rankings for you to consider:
• 2012 Roy Morgan NRL Club Supporters Poll
• 2001-2011 Roy Morgan NRL Club Supporters Poll Averages
• 2012 Crowds
• Crowds Over The Past 5 Years
• Crowds Over The Past 10 Years
• 2012 Memberships
The rankings are as follows:
• Dragons (1st, first, fourth, sixth, sixth, second)
• Eels (second, second, third, fifth, third, fourth)
• Tigers (3rd, third, fifth, first, fifth, sixth)
• Sea Eagles (4th, fifth, sixth, fourth, ninth, fifth)
• Bulldogs (5th, fourth, first, second, second, third)
• Rabbitohs (6th, sixth, second, third, first, first)
• Roosters (7th, seventh, eighth, seventh, seventh, seventh)
• Panthers (8th, eighth, ninth, eighth, eighth, eighth)
• Sharks (9th, ninth, seventh, ninth, fourth, ninth)
There are five teams (including two merged teams) – Dragons, Eels, Tigers, Bulldogs and Rabbitohs – who have never ranked in the bottom three teams for any of these metrics.
Those clubs have built up or are building a degree of stability that will ensure their long term futures.
Manly is right behind them although their rankings have had a lot more to do with their on field performance.
A few bad seasons strung together might expose some difficult truths. Ultimately though, Manly’s location and fan-base is difficult to integrate with other clubs and locations.
Abandoning everything north of the harbour would be a mistake. Their saving grace might arise in renewed business investment and a cross-promotion on the back of a revived Bears and revitalised North Sydney rugby league fan-base that returns the code to the A-list.
The obvious needs to be said about the Panthers, Roosters and Sharks: these clubs consistently rank in the bottom three. The Panthers though face similar issues to Manly.
Merging them with a natural rival like Parramatta would be similar to revisiting the Northern Eagles fiasco.
Booting them would open up a blackspot for others to fill. The main hope for Penrith is the population growth that’s destined to fall on their doorstep but planning for that, converting those people to the Panthers brand, needs to have started yesterday.
That leaves the Roosters and the Sharks. One is afflicted by shifting demographics and money has done little to remedy it.
Meanwhile, the other is also stuck in their enclave and while new developments offer a sorely needed financial stability the odds are that both will remain bottom three clubs for the rest of their existence.
However if these two clubs were to merge akin to the Wests Tigers (ranked third) and St George Illawarra Dragons (ranked first) and retained a similar base as to what those clubs did, then the new Roosters-Sharks club could rank higher than the Rabbitohs and Bulldogs in fourth place. The NRL would then have six big Sydney clubs.
Scheduling requires an all-of-game approach. There is potential for other clubs (Rabbitohs-Tigers-Dragons) to be playing home matches at the SFS.
Those three games could be combined with a five home games to form an 8 game SFS package. That’s likely more games than what current average Roosters fans are attending.
Meanwhile, seven home games could be played at Endeavour and both could be sold in a 15 game package.
As for branding I think that while the Sydney name is strong for a national comp, when there is a bunch of other clubs equally applicable, it does become a little redundant.
I would rather see a resurrection of the traditional name modified slightly as Eastern Sydney. Meanwhile, the Cronulla brand should be dropped but their mascot adopted for the new club.
The combining of those three elements has strong potential from a national marketing viewpoint.
So let’s be honest. If in five to ten years time the NRL’s money has poured in and these clubs are still at the bottom of the pecking order, drop the taboo and let’s seriously examine the benefits of the Eastern Sydney Sharks.
Now let’s hear from the hornets nest…
Reckon you can pick the winning team? Build your own dream team with Draftstars daily fantasy and compete on any match. For great odds on the NRL head on over to PlayUp. Imagine what you could be buying instead. Set a deposit limit.